A synthesis of the peer-reviewed differential bundle functioning research

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 32, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 43-55

  Banks, Kathleen ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF IOWA   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential bundle functioning; Differential item functioning; Synthesis

Indexed keywords

EID: 84875638675     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/emip.12004     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Abbott, M. L. (2006). ESL reading strategies: Differences in Arabic and Mandarin speakers test performance. Language Learning, 56, 633-670.
2. Abbott, M. L. (2007). A confirmatory approach to differential item functioning on an ESL reading assessment. Language Testing, 24(1), 7-36.
3. Abedi, J., & Lord, C. (2001). The language factor in mathematics tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 219-234.
4. Abedi, J., Lord, C., Hofstetter, C., & Baker, E. (2000). Impact of accommodation strategies on English language learners' test performance. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19(3), 16-26.
5. Abedi, J., Lord, C., & Plummer, J. R. (1997, August). Final report of language background as a variable in NAEP mathematics performance (CSE Tech. Rep. No. 429). Los Angeles, CA : University of California; Graduate School of Education and Information Studies; National Center for Research on Evaluation, Standards, and Student Testing; Center for the Study of Evaluation.
6. Ackerman, T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.
7. Angoff, W. H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & J. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 3-24). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Banks, K. (2006). A comprehensive framework for evaluating hypotheses about cultural bias in educational testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 19, 115-132.
9. Bloom, B. S. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives: Book 1. Cognitive domain . New York, NY : Longman.
10. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. (1994). Methods of identifying biased test items . Newbury Park, CA : Sage.
11. Chang, H. H., Mazzeo, J., & Roussos, L. (1996). Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 333-353.
12. Clauser, B. E., & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedures to identify differentially functioning test items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17(1), 31-44.
13. Douglas, J. A. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. (1996). Item-bundle DIF hypothesis testing: Identifying suspect bundles and assessing their differential functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 465-484.
14. Einarsdottir, S., & Rounds, J. (2009). Gender bias and construct validity in vocational interest measurement: Differential item functioning in the Strong Interest Inventory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 74, 295-307.
15. Finch, H., Barton, K., & Meyer, P. (2009). Differential item functioning analyses for accommodated versus nonaccommodated students. Educational Assessment, 14(1), 38-56.
16. Fouad, N. A., & Walker, C. M. (2005). Cultural influences on responses to items on the Strong Interest Inventory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 104-123.
17. Furlow, C. F., Ross, T. R., & Gagne, P. (2009). The impact of multidimensionality on the detection of differential bundle functioning using Simultaneous Item Bias Test. Applied Measurement in Education, 33, 441-464.
18. Gierl, M. J. (2005). Using dimensionality-based DIF analyses to identify and interpret constructs that elicit group differences. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(1), 3-14.
19. Gierl, M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G. L., & Boughton, K. A. (2003). Identifying content and cognitive skills that produce gender differences in mathematics: A demonstration of the multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 281-307.
20. Gierl, M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G. L., Boughton, K. A., & Khaliq, S. N. (2001). Illustrating the utility of differential bundle functioning analyses to identify and interpret group differences on achievement tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(2), 26-36.
21. Gierl, M. J., & Khaliq, S. N. (2001). Identifying sources of differential item and bundle functioning on translated achievement tests: A confirmatory approach. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 164-187.
22. Goldstein, B. E. (2008). Cognitive psychology: Connecting mind, research, and everyday experience (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA : Thomson Wadsworth.
23. Hofstetter, C. H. (2003). Contextual and mathematics accommodation test effects for English-language learners. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 159-188.
24. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Differential item functioning . Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
25. Kim, D. H., & Huynh, H. (2010). Equivalence of paper-and-pencil and online administration modes of the statewide English test for students with and without disabilities. Educational Assessment, 15, 107-121.
26. Kim, Y. H., & Jang, E. E. (2009). Differential functioning of reading subskills on the OSSLT for L1 and ELL students: A multidimensionality model-based DBF/DIF approach. Language Learning, 59, 825-865.
27. Kok, F. (1988). Item bias and test multidimensionality. In R. Langeheine & J. Rost (Eds.), Latent trait and latent class models (pp. 263-274). New York, NY : Plenum Press.
28. McCarty, F. A., Oshima, T. C., & Raju, N. S. (2007). Identifying possible sources of differential functioning using differential bundle functioning with polytomous scored data. Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 205-225.
29. Mendes-Barnett, S., & Ercikan, K. (2006). Examining sources of gender DIF in mathematics using a confirmatory multidimensional model approach. Applied Measurement in Education, 19, 289-304.
30. Nandakumar, R. (1993). Simultaneous dif amplification and cancellation: Shealy-Stout's test for DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 293-311.
31. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., Flowers, C. P., & Slinde, J. A. (1998). Differential bundle functioning using the DFIT framework: Procedures for identifying possible sources of differential functioning. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 353-369.
32. Raju, N. S., van der Linden, W. J., & Fleer, P. F. (1995). IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 353-368.
33. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (1996a). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 353-371.
34. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (1996b). Simulation studies of the effects of small sample size and studied item parameters of SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I error performance. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 215-230.
35. Ryan, K. E., & Chiu, S. (2001). An examination of item context effects, DIF, and gender DIF. Applied Measurement in Education, 14(1), 73-90.
36. Ryan, K. E., & Fan, M. (1996). Examining gender DIF on a multiple-choice test of mathematics: A confirmatory approach. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 15(4), 15-20.
37. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. F. (1993). A model-based standardization approach that separates true bias/DIF from group differences and detects test bias/DTF as well as item bias/DIF. Psychometrika, 58, 159-194.
38. Tatsuoka, K. K. (1993). Item construction and psychometric models appropriate for constructed response models. In R. Brennan & W. Ward (Eds.), Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement (pp. 107-133). Hillsdale, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
39. Walker, C. M., & Beretvas, N. S. (2001). An empirical investigation demonstrating the multidimensional DIF paradigm: A cognitive explanation for DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 147-163.
40. Walker, C. M., Zhang, B., & Surber, J. (2008). Using a multidimensional differential item functioning framework to determine if reading ability affects students performance in mathematics. Applied Measurement in Education, 21, 162-181.
41. Wolf, M. K., & Leon, S. (2009). An investigation of the language demands in content assessments for English language learners. Educational Assessment, 14, 139-159.
42. Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4, 223-233.